And again...

1,095 registered users | 0 active users | 0 LpH | Statistics
Login | Create New User

Welcome to IWETHEY!

Post #305,118 by beepster 3/4/09 10:11:40 PM Reply	And again... if Rush had that true power over Republicans...McCain would never have been the candidate for President. Rush tried very hard...but gee...he didn't make a difference. I will choose a path that's clear. I will choose freewill.
Post #305,124 by Andrew Grygus 3/5/09 12:06:28 AM Reply	For that argument to be valid . . . . . you have to show viable alternatives supported by Rush. If there are no truly viable alternatives it doesn't matter what anyone says, regardless of their power - and I seem to recall the Republican primary field was a basket of losers. At least Mc Cain had some name recognition.

I'm sorry, Rush. - (Silverlock) - (34) - March 4, 2009, 08:07:46 AM EST

remember McCarthy? - (boxley) - (33) - March 4, 2009, 08:49:52 AM EST

This is all a game - (beepster) - (32) - March 4, 2009, 09:58:45 AM EST

Ya know - (jake123) - (5) - March 4, 2009, 10:07:06 AM EST

face it Jake if it wasnt for hnic no one would voluntarily - (boxley) - (1) - March 4, 2009, 10:18:51 AM EST

I'd have to disagree with that - (jake123) - March 5, 2009, 10:17:28 AM EST

So when the US Gov't takes over all radio stations - (beepster) - (2) - March 4, 2009, 10:46:01 AM EST

Some places they de-facto do - (mhuber) - (1) - March 4, 2009, 01:05:41 PM EST

Just cut it out - (beepster) - March 4, 2009, 01:41:32 PM EST

No - (drook) - (19) - March 4, 2009, 10:47:25 AM EST

So don't vote for them. - (beepster) - (18) - March 4, 2009, 11:05:28 AM EST

He has the power given to him by the Republicans. HTH. -NT - (Another Scott) - (17) - March 4, 2009, 11:42:12 AM EST

They're not doing it. - (beepster) - (16) - March 4, 2009, 01:45:52 PM EST

There weren't too many Democrats at CPAC. - (Another Scott) - (15) - March 4, 2009, 02:22:12 PM EST

No I'm not (and d'uh ^^) - (beepster) - (7) - March 4, 2009, 03:20:45 PM EST

Yes you are - (drook) - (6) - March 4, 2009, 03:30:44 PM EST

BS. Pure and simple - (beepster) - (5) - March 4, 2009, 03:36:33 PM EST

I'm not talking about the campaign - (drook) - (4) - March 4, 2009, 03:45:12 PM EST

Why is that such a big deal? - (beepster) - (2) - March 4, 2009, 05:24:08 PM EST

You seem to be missing the point. - (Another Scott) - (1) - March 4, 2009, 07:38:48 PM EST

I'm missing that poiint? - (beepster) - March 4, 2009, 10:13:30 PM EST

And lets look at that apology being spun - (beepster) - March 4, 2009, 05:58:43 PM EST

..nor Father Coughlan; in the '30's: Our Rwanda propagandist - (Ashton) - (6) - March 4, 2009, 03:29:13 PM EST

Aren't I the one oft accused of falling for the ploy du jour - (beepster) - (5) - March 4, 2009, 03:32:06 PM EST

No one thinks you're dumb enough to fall for it - (drook) - (4) - March 4, 2009, 03:34:34 PM EST

Me repeating it? - (beepster) - (3) - March 4, 2009, 03:38:48 PM EST

Was referring to the "frequently accused" line - (drook) - (2) - March 4, 2009, 03:45:01 PM EST

(Surely you've known for years.. - (Ashton) - March 4, 2009, 03:56:10 PM EST

What Republican ploy would that be? - (beepster) - March 4, 2009, 05:26:34 PM EST

And by the way ... - (drook) - (5) - March 4, 2009, 03:48:20 PM EST

They have an option. - (beepster) - (4) - March 4, 2009, 05:31:08 PM EST

If that were true . . . - (Andrew Grygus) - (3) - March 4, 2009, 09:19:02 PM EST

Amenuensis. -NT - (Ashton) - March 4, 2009, 09:48:46 PM EST

And again... - (beepster) - (1) - March 4, 2009, 10:11:40 PM EST

For that argument to be valid . . . - (Andrew Grygus) - March 5, 2009, 12:06:28 AM EST